Contrary to popular belief, the difficulty in doing ‘advanced studies’ (i.e., a doctoral degree) is not something that is strangely called ‘the imposter syndrome’ [originally: www.impostersyndrome.com; changed after Blythe's comment], but rather the simple fact of doing work. Let me correct myself: a Ph.D. student can find an infinite set of ways to keep themselves occupied — reading and writing the least of them. (Let’s not forget blogging: the new home of the tenure-track and those who hope to be on the tenure-track. But then, blogging is but another form of reading and writing. A collective version whereby everyone alike can read and write without actually doing work.) I read a lot and I write a lot. I’m averaging about three quarters of a book (short, mind you) a day over the past few days. The problem, of course, is that I don’t ‘need’ to read these books. They are books I ‘need’ to read, just not right now… Eventually, but not now.
The point of all this is not prove to you that I am, in fact, doing something (even if it amounts to nothing), but rather to demonstrate that, if nothing else, I’m a good sociologist because I’ve read Durkheim. And Durkheim, you see, understood wasting time. He called it a pathological form; the “anomic division of labour”. He also said that one of the four types of suicide is anomic. (And, apparently, it’s pretty high in graduate school.) So, what does Durkheim actually say?
Since a body of rules is the definite form taken over time by the relationships established spontaneously between the social functions, we may say a priori that a state of anomie is impossible wherever organs solidly linked to one another are in sufficient contact, and in sufficiently lengthy contact. Indeed, being adjacent to one another [in the same classroom, week after week], they are easily alerted in every situation to the need for one another and consequently they experience a keen, continuous feeling of their mutual dependence [ibid]. For the same reason, exchanges between them occur easily [regular reading, discussion, evaluation]; being regular, they occur frequently; they regulate themselves and time gradually effects the task of consolidation [after four months, a mark is given and the process starts again]. Finally, because the slightest reaction can be felt throughout, the rules formed in this way bear the mark of it, that is, they foresee and fix in some detail the conditions of equilibrium [if some start to struggle, the course can be adjusted]. Yet if, on the other hand, some blocking environment [finishing coursework] is interposed between them [student and program], only stimuli of a certain intensity [missed deadlines] can communicate from one organ to another [supervisor to student]. Contacts being rare [occasional email], they are not repeated often enough to take on a determinante form [mentorship and induction into the profession]. Each time the procedure is again one of trial and error [each student/supervisor relationship is singular]. The paths along which pass the wave-like movements can no longer become definite channels because the waves themselves are too intermittent. If at least some rules are successfully constituted [deadlines and reading lists], these are general and vague [deadlines and reading lists have no meaning], for in these conditions only the most general outlines of the phenomena can be fixed [soon and about this length]. The same is true of closeness of contact: whilst it is sufficient [meetings can be informative], it is too recent or has lasted too short a while [meetings are soon forgotten].
There you have it: Durkheim explains why graduate school goes from being easy (coursework) to hard (comprehensives) to impossible (dissertation). And it has nothing to do with the work itself.
(Note: despite the title, I’m not ABD!)
4 Comments
Why do you feel “the imposter syndrome” is “strangely called”? Or that it is not a problem, or not a significant and important one. That the problem, instead, is just “the simple fact of doing work”? Right. It’s not that women and people of colour are crippled by a fear of being a fake; if they can’t do the work in a complete and timely fashion, without reservation, it’s that they are, in fact, incompetent. There is no “imposter syndrome”, or, if there is, it’s a non-issue, an excuse the weak rely on to pass.
Of course, it isn’t relevant for you – you are a white man. No one is going to find you out or fault you for being something you’re not. And, please, if you invoke your non-status one eighth Indian pedigree, I will put ground glass in your food. I’ve seen snowflakes darker than you (even with those patches of conjoined freckles you call a tan); but pollution will do that, I guess.
You can’t possibly discount that the “imposter syndrome” is an insidious force pushing women and people of colour out of your way. Sure, it’s psychological, but the factors involved are not entirely internal. It’s easy, and attractive, for you to dismiss it, though. The feelings of being less-than, not worth it, not having what it takes, or not belonging allow you (and those like you – white men) to make more money, attain higher positions of prestige and authority (administratively and academically within a university), and just generally seem better at everything.
I bet you don’t believe in a “chilly climate” either. Dude, you’re such a dick. No debate, just own it real proud like.
hi Craig,
Interesting stuff. You seem to have touched a nerve. The impostor syndrome thing sounds like it’s a red herring to me. Particularly if the idea is used to attribute privileges to being the result of a sort of self-selection by those who are less privileged – Blythe implies that the activities of women and people of color are to blame for the power of white men. Maybe, I can’t say. I’d imagine that hiring decisions and standards of evaluation are more of the problem (but then, I’m a dick).
On the other hand, I can relate to some of those feelings of inadequacy etc. But I think the issue with impostor syndrome etc is precisely an issue of finishing the work. One of things that strikes me as a new graduate student, and in reading your post, is that the psychopathologies of people in grad school (and at least partially inculcated by the place) are an important moment of the university labor process and its various outcomes.
I wish I had more to say about this but I don’t, it’s something I’ve just started to think about and try to understand (partially as a form of psychic self-defense and/or workplace organizing in my new environs).
take care,
Nate
Hi Nate -
Blythe is my partner. She’s quite right, I think. I did (in the original version, although the edit is preserved above) post the wrong link and my comment on the link was inappropriate to the content. The new link is the one I intended to post in the first place…
As for the “Imposter Syndrome”, there seems to have been some sort of “democratization” of the concept: where the original research pointed to (for lack of a better term) the “alienation’ of women and racial minorities vis a vis the standard white male in academia (something that remains firmly entrenched, mind you), more recent work (including a tool at my own university) has Dr. Phil-ed the idea: every feels like and should feel like an imposter in graduate school. If you don’t, then you are only lying to yourself.
In other words, the idea has been re-mobilized to explain problems in the political economy of graduate school: i.e., why people take longer to get their degrees and why they are more and more in debt. Rather than pointing to socio-economic factors (i.e., neo-liberal privatization, utilitarian and business models, etc), psychological factors become determinant; i.e., “I’m not doing well because I don’t feel like I belong here”.
Pure bullshit.
Of course, what “I’m not doing well because I don’t feel like I belong here” translates into is a disjunction between the practice of graduate school (i.e., roughly speaking, a meritocracy) and the marketing of graduate school (i.e., if you can pay, you deserve it). Thus, the problem becomes the myth we all hear, “I was the best in my program in undergrad, but now I’m just average, or even mediocre”. In other words: “People used to tell me how great I am, but now they don’t”.
Of course, being a genius, people always tell me how great I am! Or, maybe, I’m just not stupid (or naive) enough to buy into this shit. Socio-economic factors notwithstanding, I don’t think actually doing graduate work is particularly impressive or special… for the most part, anyone who was fortunate enough to attend a decent high school and go to a decent university is more than capable of doing graduate (or professional) school.
I’ll stop: I’ve said too much.
hi Craig,
I agree – graduate school isn’t particularly impressive or special. It’s nice to hear someone else say that. I’ve just started and the attitude seems to come up all the time that there’s something special – and important, radical even – about being in a university in the humanities. Ugh.
It’s also a job, and one that’s not a permanent one but rather a means toward another end (hopefully). I do think some of the feelings of inadequacy etc that are part of the grad school experience are not incidental (it may just be that I’m stupid and naive and so I fall for it) but are part of how the game keeps moving along. I’m not sure I agree that school is meritocratic, unless you mean the merit of knowing how to succeed based on the school’s standards. To say otherwise (some substantive merit to school beyond meeting the local standards) would I think end up implying that there is in fact something special and impressive about graduate school. It seems to me that one key to success is simply to learn to talk in the idioms prescribed and observe certain codes of ettiquette (sp?).
I also think that the emotional and other shitty parts of grad school may be part of the occupational hazards of the industry – some people in other industries get carpal tunnel syndrome, some people in this industry get mental illnesses or annoying conversational habits like droning on at length in a self-important fashion. Perhaps our industry could use an equivalent to ergonomics.
take care,
Nate
Post a Comment